Paul Russell: Does anything trump the right to self-defence?

Does anything trump the right to self-defence? n

After last Friday’s slaughter of 26 innocents in Newtown, Conn., many readers have been speculating on what societal factors contributed to this event. Lax U.S. gun laws and mental illness were commonly cited — only one person linked it to diet.

“I would like to propose that we examine our own desensitization of death in our everyday actions, something as innocuous as our eating habits,” wrote Patricia Tallman, leader of the B.C. vegan group, Langley Herbivores. “How can we, as a species, expect peace in the world when our very existence is directly responsible for egregious violence committed against innocent beings to the tune of 64 billion farmed land animals worldwide per year, and one to three trillion sea animals annually? How can we expect peace on Earth when humans inflict such unnecessary violence routinely on other innocent beings every time we consume meat and dairy?”

Many readers called for more gun control. (On Monday’s Letters page, watch for a full-page of responses to the question: Do Canadian gun laws need to change?) Others countered that firearms in the hands of well-trained, responsible adults pose no threat to others, and in fact, increase public safety and social stability.

“Safety procedures around schools do not work with a maniac on the loose,” wrote Ken Stunell. “Boards of education should require principals and vice-principals to be trained in the use of a gun before assuming office, and then carry a concealed weapon. Studies are clear — crimes are stopped by guns five times more frequently than crimes committed by guns. Sounds like the Old West, but by golly, it saves lives.”

“Having travelled the world on business over the last 30 years, I have witnessed for myself what happens when government seeks to control the guns in civilian hands,” added Bryan Moir. “It might be cliché to say, but they are the tools of freedom.”

This reader said it is foolhardy to try to reach a consensus on this issue.

“Opinions on gun control are like opinions on abortion: a reflection of each person’s fundamental values and weltanschauung (philosophy of life),” wrote Dan Haggarty. “There will never be a consensus on how to deal with it. Is it appropriate for the philosopher kings of Plato’s republic to disarm the proletarian masses? Should democratic votes be allowed to trump a natural right to self defence? The best answer is a light hand on the coercive whip of the state.”

More than one reader asked the media not to give the Newtown shooter any more coverage, claiming that will only inspire copycats.

“It seems wrong to me that we all know the gunman’s name, and that there is a tab [trending topic] at the top of your Internet homepage not just for the shooting, but with his name,” wrote a reader identified only as Bob. “Who was the principal? The teachers? The heroes or the victims? These people deserve to be remembered. Please stop giving evil the fame it does not deserve.”

By the end of the week, some readers had heard enough about this school shooting.

“As if media coverage of the dreadful event at Newtown hasn’t been nauseatingly enough, just think of what is it going to be like on the anniversary in 12 months,” wrote Roy Smith. “The mind boggles at all the maudlin garbage awaiting us.”

— The Letters page gives regular Canadians a place to express opinions. But sometimes we run letters from more famous people. Such as on Tuesday, when we ran a letter from former NDP leader Ed Broadbent (“Coyne is wrong about income gap”). That brought in this note.

“I’m noticing an increasing trend in your paper, and others, of taking up valuable letters to the editor space with letters from public figures,” wrote Greig Birchfield. “I think the Letters page should be devoted, with very rare exceptions, to your readers. This page is one of the few avenues for us to express our opinions.”

Fair points, Mr. Birchfield, but since Mr. Broadbent is no longer a public figure, I think there was nothing wrong with giving him a voice. While I agree that this page should primarily be a forum for regular readers, notes from Cabinet minister and government bureaucrats will occasionally find a home here, also.

— The Letters page question-of-the-week is usually related to a current news item. But next week’s question has been inspired by the following note, from a vintage reader.

“My Christmas wish is for the National Post to ask readers to write about what gives them joy/satisfaction/what they are grateful for,” wrote Esther Paul. “Some time ago, you asked about our pet peeves or dissatisfactions. This was a real downer. Negativity begets negativity. At 80, I have many, many things to be grateful for, but the most important is the gift of my life and the love therein: love received and love given.”

A great suggestion, Ms. Paul. If other readers want an early start on next week’s question, answerable in 75 words or fewer, tell us what you are grateful for.

–Some people refuse to read the National Post, claiming that it is too conservative. So it is refreshing to hear from readers who very much take the opposite view.

“I have been reading the Post online, and I am really impressed not only by its national news coverage, its columnists and its design — surely one of the best online newspapers in the world — and its balance of opinions,” wrote M. Cox. “Whether or not you are a ‘conservative’ newspaper, I am now reading the Post regularly. You are to be congratulated for your independent stand on issues. The recent opinion column on the missing women and the Pickton report is one such example. The Post is a refreshing change, and were I not living in an apartment where every attempt at subscribing to a print edition ends up with most issues being stolen, I would get it delivered.

In the wake of a Grammy Awards ceremony that disappointed many, from Kanye West to the masses on Twitter lamenting the state of pop music, a historical perspective is key. Few are better poised to offer one than Andy Kim.